Timendainum

Make sure you have CH control manager installed. Set up a custom map for the plane. Set the detent level to 200 for each throttle and condition (prop) lever. Make sure to calibrate everything in CH control manager. Click the upload button in CH control manager, save the map. Reset up everything in xplane because now it shows up as a new device. Uncheck the "this is a ch throttle" checkbox in x-plane. Tada! I've found using this utility and the plane profile in xplane and some tweaking, I can get just about any behavior I need out of the CH throttle quadrant.

Nice! Already got a couple flights in!

Great news! Glad to hear you guys are thinking about this tinkering crowd even though there are probably not a ton of us. Glad to hear you are going to publish datarefs as well. It has been like pulling teeth to get information out of some plane developers concerning external interfaces. I believe I only have one plane with Gizmo in it, so I haven't dealt with it directly. I should, as I know, and program in lua frequently. My solutions are pretty straightforward, I'm not using some of the more esoteric solutions. I've been using Arduino and ArdSim library, which makes short work out of the programming side of things and keeps all the heavy lifting in actually building the panels.

Looking forward to your upcoming release! I do have a quick question. Have you guys been able to expose a lot of datarefs and commands for the plane? I love to play around with external screens (like Air Manager) and build hardware cockpit panels. Sometimes getting all the data we need can be tricky. Are you guys exposing everything we need to create external panels, and reproduce the output of all glass screens, including the FMS, on external panels? I warn you, I'll be one of the first guys trying to dig these up after you release! Good luck on your launch, I know lots of people are looking forward to this plane!

You are right, that was a pretty nasty comment on my part. I retract the statement.

The pace of this forum is such that posting every few days seems appropriate. I'm sorry if it isn't in your view. I was under the understand that the purpose of a forum was to learn, and share your own opinions. You didn't really lay it out clearly. You were pissed off that that other guy interjected into the thread, and jumped down my throat when I asked what you meant. Yes, I can totally understand this. If you had said this, it would have made more sense. The example you gave, which you said was simplified, reflected a different assertion than what I took away from it. This I was definitely mistaken on, at the time I was under the impression you only supported windows, after visiting your website I have learned you support OSX as well. Hey, I'm sorry people have been hassling you into supporting their favorite platform. I really didn't come here to piss you off, I really have not been a member of this forum for long, and honestly I was just looking to figure out what you saying. The comment you made to the other guy really seemed to imply that you were under the impression that Linux people don't pay for any software, and the implication was that they pirated it. This is why I asked the original question. You quickly cleared up that you were not implying piracy, and then began to discuss your other argument. Which I continued to discuss with you. Your example implied to me that you spent like development time, when really you were just trying to say that it takes more time that you ever end up returning in sales. Again, I apologize, I really was not trying to be inciteful, I was just trying to get clarification on your arguments.

Because most of them are incapable of communicating without alienating their customers? I think lots of developers are very good at this, some of them are terrible. I think you could have easily made your point without sounding like a jerk, but you chose not to. I might suggest that you say something like this: "At our development house, we do have not have the resources to sustain development for multiple platforms, while remaining profitable. This is strictly a business decision for us. Should the market change, we will reconsider this in the future." Instead you chose to be rude to your customers. I don't see a single comment I made which was rude, even in the slightest. My correspondence here has been professional, and to the point.

I am beginning to understand why this community was forced to separate from x-plane.org. I'm a bit ashamed I've spent money at the store here.

You love to alienate customers don't you? Keeping on topic, it really seems like the safe option for now is to avoid Windows 10, as mentioned in the x-plane.org forums (listed above).

Long term, I think x-plugins.com position may change. There is a lot going on in terms of what Microsoft wants to do with their software distribution. There have been plenty of rumblings about MS closing off software updates and forcing them through their store. We have already seen them kabash XBox Projects (Dust 514) because they would not agree to allow updates to flow through without MS getting their 30% cut. With Microsoft moving to the free OS distribution model, you will see them put the squeeze on software developers. Guys like x-plugins.com will end up paying a 30% royalty to MS for distribution rights. This will either squeeze guys like x-plugins.com out of business, or you will adapt, or hard core PC gaming will move away from Microsoft. What Microsoft is doing here is transferring the revenue stream. Rather than having the end user pay directly for it, they will force software developers to pay for it, and pass the cost on to the consumer through them. Really, it is brilliant, and a complete win for Microsoft. Apple, believe it or not, has a bit softer attitude about this, but I wouldn't look to the holy grail to be produced by them. Google, they aren't even in this market yet. In the very unscientific sample of my groups of friends, whom are all IT guys in one way or another, and whom tend to buy more "hardcore" types of games, and therefore are somewhat more representative of the more serious gaming crowd, a few of them have moved to linux primarily, and a few of them have gotten macs here in the past couple of years. The reason they are able to do this is because of the efforts of Valve. Valve has over the past 2 made linux and mac gaming a possibility. Therefore the Mac and Linux gaming communities have grown substantially. Several of the commercial producers on this site are very focused on Windows now. Like I said earlier, it makes sense, if you look at the past of the market. But, markets like everything else change. They are changing. I for one believe that what Microsoft is doing is putting nitch gaming at risk. These small time developers are most likely going to go out of business, because they do not have the capability for strategic foresight, largely due to their small size, and based on the statements from the above posts some ignorance in what is happening in the IT market. Times are changing, and the market will speak. Hopefully our hobby will survive.

As a programmer, who has programmed both games, and mods for games, although, not specifically for x-plane, I think your basis for the argument that it would cost you as much development time for the support of additional OSs, as it did to develop the base product is incorrect. You should not be redoing the bulk of your development, in both art assets and programming assets for each platform. If you are redoing everything completely from scratch, you are clearly doing it very, very wrong. But, you answered my question. Your comment, while crude, was to point out that you do not believe developing product for linux, and apparently OSX, is worth the money to you. It's a fair judgment call to make. I understand why you might make that call. Your public relations on the other hand leave a lot to be desired.

I'm not even sure what argument you are trying to make here? What, linux users don't pay for things? Can you clarify your position? Seems to me, I've paid for numerous pay aircraft, plugins and xplane itself. I think the point the poster above was making is that most of us linux users are forced to run windows to use a good deal of products because add on companies don't know how to use cross compilers, or are to lazy to do so. I don't see how running linux at all implies that linux users are not willing to pay for payware products. Your comments here seem misinformed, or ignorant. Not sure which. Please clarify your position. I am going to suggest that the add on developers for any and all flight sim related products start reading articles like this: http://betanews.com/2016/03/04/windows-10-universal-windows-platform-monopoly/ Microsoft is working on taking 30% of your GM from you. In nitch markets like flight simming this is going to push a lot of you guys out of business. You might want to consider starting to support platforms that are not looking at shutting you out of the marketplace. Because if you think Microsoft or Apple aren't closing the door on you, you need to open your eyes. Of course, unless you want to take a 30% pay cut, and be subservient to the Microsoft's of the world.

Sounds great, can't wait to try it out!

I did install the dataref tool, was able to find most of what I needed. The external CDU is very unstable on my system. Phillip and I have been trying to figure out why. Flight plan info does not seem like it is available in the datarefs. All I can find is the next waypoint, not the entire flight plan. So reproducing the map MFD is impossible? I'm not a huge fan of the external CDU on the CRJ, the buttons do not line up with click areas properly, and the view is not straight on, and also, since it is in a browser window it has an ugly border that does not mesh with my other external panels well.

I have a 970. I don't have a much payware scenery, but I use HD meshes and lots of other add ons. Texture usage is all over the map depending on what I am doing, in what plane, and where. But, I always try to keep texture usage below 3.5GB to stay out of the problem area in this card: http://wccftech.com/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-memory-issue-fully-explained/